DOCSLIB.ORG

Cleaning Symbiosis Among California Inshore Fishes'

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cleaning Symbiosis Among California Inshore Fishes' CLEANING SYMBIOSIS AMONG CALIFORNIA INSHORE FISHES ' EDMUND S. HOBSON' ABSTRACT Cleaning symbiosis among shor e fi shes was studied during 1968 and 1969 in southern California, with work centered at La J olla. Three species are habitua l cleaners: the seiiorita, Oxyjulis cali/ornica; the sharpnose seaperch, Phanerodon atripes; and the kelp perch, Brachyistius /1·enatus. Because of specific differences in habitat, there is little overlap in the cleaning areas of these three spe­ cies. Except for juvenile sha rpnose sea per ch, cleaning is of secondary significance to these species, even though it may be of major significance to certain individuals. The tendency to clean varies between in­ dividuals. Principal prey of most members of these species are free-living organisms picked from a substrate and from midwater-a mode of feeding that favors adaptations suited to cleaning. Because it is exceedingly abundant in a variety of habitats, the eiiorita is the predominant inshore cleaning fish in Ca lifornia. Certain aspects of its cl eaning relate to the fact that only a few of the many senoritas present at a given time will clean, and that this activity is not centered around well-defined cleaning stations, as has been repor ted for certain cleaning fishes elsewhere. Probably because cleaners are difficult to recognize among the many senoritas that do not clean, other fishes generally do not at­ tempt to initiate cleaning; r a ther , the activity is consistently initiated by the cleaner itself. An infest­ ed fish approached by a cleaner genera lly drifts into an unusual attitude that advertises the temporary existence of the transient cleaning station to other fish in need of service, and these converge on the cleaner. Although senoritas, as a group, clean a number of different fishes, a given individual tends to initiate cleaning with member s of j ust one species. The fi shes cleaned most of ten a re those which are most abw1dant and, at the same time, are most heavily infested with external parasites. The most numerous ectoparasites are caligid copepods, the most abundant and widespread of which is Caligus hobsoni. These particular parasites, along with gnathiid isopod larvae, a re the major prey of the cleaning fishes. Cleaning is essentially limited to the external body surface ; ectoparasites of the oral and branchial cavities are not ordinarily taken. Clean­ ing effectively r educes the number of parasites on fishes that are cleaned, and is an important activity for the organisms involved. However, there is no basis for the co ntention that many good fishing grounds in southern California exist because fi shes have congregated in these locations for cleaning. It has been suggested that many of the better reasons that have nothing to do with cleaning. inshore fishing spots are, in fact, cleaning sta­ Regardless of which view is correct in a given tions (Limbaugh, 1961; Feder, 1966) . The situation, one having witnessed fishes crowded contention is that fishes congregate at these lo­ around a cleaner, vigorously soliciting its ser­ cations so that ectoparasites and other deleteri­ vices, can only conclude that this activity is in­ ous material can be removed from their bodies deed important to the organisms involved. by resident cleaning organisms. Critics of this Cleaning symbiosis has been widely described hypothesis might well suggest instead that clean­ in the literature (Longley and Hildebrand, 1941; ers simply are especially active where fi shes are Eibl-Eibesfeldt, 1955 ; Limbaugh, 1955, 1961; most abundant, or that the cleaners as well as Randall, 1958, 1962; and others) and was re­ viewed by Feder (1966). Youngbluth (196 ) those they clean occur at these locations for studied activity of the Hawaiian cleaning labrid Labl'oides phthil'ophagus in some detail, and 1 Contribution of Scripps Institution of Oceanography. • National Marine Fisheries Service, Tiburon Sport Losey (1971) analyzed the communicative sig­ Fisheries Marine Laborator y, Tiburon, Calif., and nals between this same pecies and the fishes that Scripps Institution of Oceanogr aph y, University of Cal­ ifornia, San Diego, Calif. Mailing address: National it cleans. But most other reports on cleaning Marine Fisheries Service, Fisher y-Oceanography Center, have been simple treatments based largely on P.O. Box 271, La J olla, Calif. 92037. Manuscript accepted March 197 1. FISHERY BULLETIN : VOL. 69. NO.3. 1971. 491 FI IIFRY OLLLETJ. ' VOL 69, 0 3 incidental obse]'Yatinns, In this report, I d - scribe cleaning symbiosis among- inshore flshes of southern California ,md attempt to relate oh­ Mosl of th cleaning during this "en'ed actiyity with the incidence of speciflc ::;luciy \\ a, p I'form d by th fi rita Figure 1) , ectoparasi tes, \\ hich \)y virtu of it..'i great abundance in a va­ Conrad Limbaug-h, Scripps Institution of I'i ty of habitat." i th PI' d mine nl cleaner in­ Oceal1ogra phy. was a mon g- the fI rs t to report ::;1101', The 'harpno." seap rch (Figur 2 ) was cleaning s~'mbiosis among California fi shes, In frequently ok I'V ct cl aning, but it acti ity is a stud~' of fishes of the kelp hed::;. Limhaug-h centered ill de p r water. Th k II> perch (Fig­ (l!););) de::;c rihed cleaning' h~' the seiiorita, (1.1'­ ure :1) may h an important clean r in the can­ !ljlliis ('oli/url/inf, a fish of the famlly Lahridae, opy reg-ion of th k Ip for st . wh re it concen- and also h~' seyeral seapprches of the family Emhiotocidac: the kelp perch, n/'(/( hyistiliR frcl/utlls; the hlack perch. EIII/,int()('11 j((('ks()lIi; and the pile perch. Rh(l('rl('h illls I'ff(,C([, ,uh::;­ quent ohsen'ers ha\ e de::;Cl'iled cll>an1l1~ hy the rainlJo\\' seaperch, H!Il)SlIrIlS ('(()lli (;otshall. 1967); the sharpllose seaperch. PIUflll'rnd()1I tIt ril'( S (Cia I'k(>. Flechsi!-!', and (; ri~~. 19(,7; Cotshall. 1%7; Hohson, 1969a); and the black­ smith. C'hl'olllis IJl/llctil,illllis (Turner. Ehert, and Gi\'en. 1969), FIGlRE 1.- iiorila, F IGl' KE 2,-Sha r pnose sea per ch a mong branches of a gor gon ian, 492 HOBSON : CLEA INC SYMBIOSIS trates, but this was not determined in this tudy all pecimen and "'ill b report d in dr>t:lil 1:­ because observations in the kelp-canopy habitat where in collaboration with R. F. r :.:ey, l O.•. were infrequent. Nevertheless, observations ational l\Iu,eum. The e coli ction: al'o pro­ were sufficient to recognize the kelp perch as a vided the material for de:scription: of 11 :1' ci .. habitual cleaner. The only other fi sh seen clean­ of cope pod formerly new to scienc ('r ... y, ing was the white seaperch, Phanerodon fur­ 1969a, 1969b, 1970; J. Ro, alifornia. t:.lt (;1- catt~, in which cleaning seemed to be onl y an lege, Long Beach, unpublbhed manuscript). d­ occasional incidental activity. ditional undescrib d species may occur among­ a number of copepods from these coil ction: METHODS presently und r study by Z. Kabata, Biolog-ical Station, Xanaimo, British Columbia. During 1968 and 1969, I spent more than 103 In addition to a survey of the ctopara.ite., hr underwater directly observing cl eaning and gut content of known cleaning :pecie:, including related activity in California inshor e waters. material from .):1 sei1oritas, ~~l :harpllo. e . ('<1- Also contributing to the study are many in ci­ perch, and 3 kelp perch, were anal~·zecl. dental observations of cleaning made during Many ectoparasites leave their host \\'h n it other work with California fi shes between 1961 is in difliculty, and some fishes regurgitate their and 1970. stomach contents under stress. To reduce this Supplementing the observations, 421 speci­ loss, all specimens "'ere indi\'idllally seal'd ill mens of 39 species were collected with spear. plastic bags immediately upon capture, and \\'hile These r epresent mo t of the species common in still underwater. the study area that exceed a length of 100 mm To acquire detailed data on the cleaning' in­ (all lengths of fishes in this r eport are standar d teraction, a numher of indi\'idllals of cl :lninJ,! length). The ectoparasites were coll ected from species \\'ere kept under surveillance for periods FIGt 'RE :3.-Kelp perch next to g-iant hlp, I 3 FISflERY B LLETlN: VOL 6?, r-;o J up to 15 min, and a verbal account of their ac­ in comparison to some area nearby to the so uth tivity was recorded on tape. The attempted and elsewhere in al ifornia. ther details of standard of 15 min could not be maintained for lhe principal study area will be introduced as all these observations because sometimes con­ they become pertinent. tact with the fish being watched was lost as the During all observation periods at the La Jolla fish swam among vegetation or other fishes. In­ tations a record was kept of water temperatures dividuals followed included known cleaners as from surface to bottom, horizontal visibility, and well as others that had nol shown evidence of urge condi tions. cleaning. In monitoring the activity of known cleaners, a record was kept of the time during OB ERVATI which they showed an apparent cleaning inter­ est in other fish and also the number of cI aning GE ERAL ECOL GY bouts in which they became involved. A clean­ ing bout is defined here as any cleaning activity eiio rita involving a discrete group of fishes, whether this The , enorita, which attain a length of about group includes one cleaner attending a single 2:)0 mm, i one of the most abundant fi hes in fi sh, or several cleaners attending a c1u tel' of the in shore waters of southel'l1 alifornia, in­ 40 to 50 fi h.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Marine Ecology Progress Series 477:177
    Vol. 477: 177–188, 2013 MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Published March 12 doi: 10.3354/meps10144 Mar Ecol Prog Ser Larval exposure to shared oceanography does not cause spatially correlated recruitment in kelp forest fishes Jenna M. Krug*, Mark A. Steele Department of Biology, California State University, 18111 Nordhoff St., Northridge, California 91330-8303, USA ABSTRACT: In organisms that have a life history phase whose dispersal is influenced by abiotic forcing, if individuals of different species are simultaneously exposed to the same forcing, spa- tially correlated settlement patterns may result. Such correlated recruitment patterns may affect population and community dynamics. The extent to which settlement or recruitment is spatially correlated among species, however, is not well known. We evaluated this phenomenon among 8 common kelp forest fishes at 8 large reefs spread over 30 km of the coast of Santa Catalina Island, California. In addition to testing for correlated recruitment, we also evaluated the influences of predation and habitat quality on spatial patterns of recruitment. Fish and habitat attributes were surveyed along transects 7 times during 2008. Using these repeated surveys, we also estimated the mortality rate of the prey species that settled most consistently (Oxyjulis californica) and evaluated if mortality was related to recruit density, predator density, or habitat attributes. Spatial patterns of recruitment of the 8 study species were seldom correlated. Recruitment of all species was related to one or more attributes of the habitat, with giant kelp abundance being the most widespread predictor of recruitment. Mortality of O. californica recruits was density-dependent and declined with increasing canopy cover of giant kelp, but was unrelated to predator density.
    [Show full text]
  • Field Guide to the Nonindigenous Marine Fishes of Florida
    Field Guide to the Nonindigenous Marine Fishes of Florida Schofield, P. J., J. A. Morris, Jr. and L. Akins Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for their use by the United States goverment. Pamela J. Schofield, Ph.D. U.S. Geological Survey Florida Integrated Science Center 7920 NW 71st Street Gainesville, FL 32653 [email protected] James A. Morris, Jr., Ph.D. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Ocean Service National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science Center for Coastal Fisheries and Habitat Research 101 Pivers Island Road Beaufort, NC 28516 [email protected] Lad Akins Reef Environmental Education Foundation (REEF) 98300 Overseas Highway Key Largo, FL 33037 [email protected] Suggested Citation: Schofield, P. J., J. A. Morris, Jr. and L. Akins. 2009. Field Guide to Nonindigenous Marine Fishes of Florida. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 92. Field Guide to Nonindigenous Marine Fishes of Florida Pamela J. Schofield, Ph.D. James A. Morris, Jr., Ph.D. Lad Akins NOAA, National Ocean Service National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 92. September 2009 United States Department of National Oceanic and National Ocean Service Commerce Atmospheric Administration Gary F. Locke Jane Lubchenco John H. Dunnigan Secretary Administrator Assistant Administrator Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................ i Methods .....................................................................................................ii
    [Show full text]
  • CHECKLIST and BIOGEOGRAPHY of FISHES from GUADALUPE ISLAND, WESTERN MEXICO Héctor Reyes-Bonilla, Arturo Ayala-Bocos, Luis E
    ReyeS-BONIllA eT Al: CheCklIST AND BIOgeOgRAphy Of fISheS fROm gUADAlUpe ISlAND CalCOfI Rep., Vol. 51, 2010 CHECKLIST AND BIOGEOGRAPHY OF FISHES FROM GUADALUPE ISLAND, WESTERN MEXICO Héctor REyES-BONILLA, Arturo AyALA-BOCOS, LUIS E. Calderon-AGUILERA SAúL GONzáLEz-Romero, ISRAEL SáNCHEz-ALCántara Centro de Investigación Científica y de Educación Superior de Ensenada AND MARIANA Walther MENDOzA Carretera Tijuana - Ensenada # 3918, zona Playitas, C.P. 22860 Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Sur Ensenada, B.C., México Departamento de Biología Marina Tel: +52 646 1750500, ext. 25257; Fax: +52 646 Apartado postal 19-B, CP 23080 [email protected] La Paz, B.C.S., México. Tel: (612) 123-8800, ext. 4160; Fax: (612) 123-8819 NADIA C. Olivares-BAñUELOS [email protected] Reserva de la Biosfera Isla Guadalupe Comisión Nacional de áreas Naturales Protegidas yULIANA R. BEDOLLA-GUzMáN AND Avenida del Puerto 375, local 30 Arturo RAMíREz-VALDEz Fraccionamiento Playas de Ensenada, C.P. 22880 Universidad Autónoma de Baja California Ensenada, B.C., México Facultad de Ciencias Marinas, Instituto de Investigaciones Oceanológicas Universidad Autónoma de Baja California, Carr. Tijuana-Ensenada km. 107, Apartado postal 453, C.P. 22890 Ensenada, B.C., México ABSTRACT recognized the biological and ecological significance of Guadalupe Island, off Baja California, México, is Guadalupe Island, and declared it a Biosphere Reserve an important fishing area which also harbors high (SEMARNAT 2005). marine biodiversity. Based on field data, literature Guadalupe Island is isolated, far away from the main- reviews, and scientific collection records, we pres- land and has limited logistic facilities to conduct scien- ent a comprehensive checklist of the local fish fauna, tific studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental DNA Reveals the Fine-Grained and Hierarchical
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Environmental DNA reveals the fne‑grained and hierarchical spatial structure of kelp forest fsh communities Thomas Lamy 1,2*, Kathleen J. Pitz 3, Francisco P. Chavez3, Christie E. Yorke1 & Robert J. Miller1 Biodiversity is changing at an accelerating rate at both local and regional scales. Beta diversity, which quantifes species turnover between these two scales, is emerging as a key driver of ecosystem function that can inform spatial conservation. Yet measuring biodiversity remains a major challenge, especially in aquatic ecosystems. Decoding environmental DNA (eDNA) left behind by organisms ofers the possibility of detecting species sans direct observation, a Rosetta Stone for biodiversity. While eDNA has proven useful to illuminate diversity in aquatic ecosystems, its utility for measuring beta diversity over spatial scales small enough to be relevant to conservation purposes is poorly known. Here we tested how eDNA performs relative to underwater visual census (UVC) to evaluate beta diversity of marine communities. We paired UVC with 12S eDNA metabarcoding and used a spatially structured hierarchical sampling design to assess key spatial metrics of fsh communities on temperate rocky reefs in southern California. eDNA provided a more‑detailed picture of the main sources of spatial variation in both taxonomic richness and community turnover, which primarily arose due to strong species fltering within and among rocky reefs. As expected, eDNA detected more taxa at the regional scale (69 vs. 38) which accumulated quickly with space and plateaued at only ~ 11 samples. Conversely, the discovery rate of new taxa was slower with no sign of saturation for UVC.
    [Show full text]
  • Cleaning Symbiosis Among California Inshore Fishes
    CLEANING SYMBIOSIS AMONG CALIFORNIA INSHORE FISHES EDMUNDS. HOBSON' ABSTRACT Cleaning symbiosis among shore fishes was studied during 1968 and 1969 in southern California, with work centered at La Jolla. Three species are habitual cleaners: the seAoriF, Ozyjulis californica; the sharpnose seaperch, Phanerodon atripes; and the kelp perch, Brachyistius frenatus. Because of specific differences in habitat, there is little overlap in the cleaning areas of these three spe- cies. Except for juvenile sharpnose seaperch, cleaning is of secondary significance to these species, even though it may be of major significance to certain individuals. The tendency to clean varies between in- dividuals. Principal prey of most members of these species are free-living organisms picked from a substrate and from midwater-a mode of feeding that favors adaptations suited to cleaning. Because it is exceedingly abundant in a variety of habitats, the seiiorita is the predominant inshore cleaning fish in California. Certain aspects of its cleaning relate to the fact that only a few of the many seiioritas present at a given time will clean, and that this activity is not centered around well-defined cleaning stations, as has been reported for certain cleaning fishes elsewhere. Probably because cleaners are difficult to recognize among the many seiioritas that do not clean, other fishes.generally do not at- tempt to initiate-cleaning; rather, the activity is consistently initiated by the cleaner itself. An infest- ed fish approached by a cleaner generally drifts into an unusual attitude that advertises the temporary existence of the transient cleaning station to other fish in need of service, and these converge on the cleaner.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Species Likely to Benefit from Marine Protected Areas in The
    Appendix C: Species Likely to Benefit from MPAs andSpecial-Status Species This appendix contains two sections: C.1 Species likely to benefit from marine protected areas in the MLPA South Coast Study Region C.2 Special status species likely to occur in the MLPA South Coast Study Region C.1 Species Likely to Benefit From MPAs The Marine Life Protection Act requires that species likely to benefit from MPAs be identified; identification of these species will contribute to the identification of habitat areas that will support achieving the goals of the MLPA. The California Marine Life Protection Act Master Plan for Marine Protected Areas (DFG 2008) includes a broad list of species likely to benefit from protection within MPAs. The master plan also indicates that regional lists will be developed by the MLPA Master Plan Science Advisory Team (SAT) for each study region described in the master plan. A list of species likely to benefit for the MLPA South Coast Study Region (Point Conception in Santa Barbara County to the California/Mexico border in San Diego County) has been compiled and approved by the SAT. The SAT used a scoring system to develop the list of species likely to benefit. This scoring system was developed to provide a metric that is more useful when comparing species than a simple on/off the list metric. Each species was scored using “1” to indicate a criterion was met or “0” to indicate a criterion was not met. Species on the list meet the following filtering criteria: they occur in the study region, they must score a “1” for either
    [Show full text]
  • Vii Fishery-At-A-Glance: California Sheephead
    Fishery-at-a-Glance: California Sheephead (Sheephead) Scientific Name: Semicossyphus pulcher Range: Sheephead range from the Gulf of California to Monterey Bay, California, although they are uncommon north of Point Conception. Habitat: Both adult and juvenile Sheephead primarily reside in kelp forest and rocky reef habitats. Size (length and weight): Male Sheephead can grow up to a length of three feet (91 centimeters) and weigh over 36 pounds (16 kilograms). Life span: The oldest Sheephead ever reported was a male at 53 years. Reproduction: As protogynous hermaphrodites, all Sheephead begin life as females, and older, larger females can develop into males. They are batch spawners, releasing eggs and sperm into the water column multiple times during their spawning season from July to September. Prey: Sheephead are generalist carnivores whose diet shifts throughout their growth. Juveniles primarily consume small invertebrates like tube-dwelling polychaetes, bryozoans and brittle stars, and adults shift to consuming larger mobile invertebrates like sea urchins. Predators: Predators of adult Sheephead include Giant Sea Bass, Soupfin Sharks and California Sea Lions. Fishery: Sheephead support both a popular recreational and a commercial fishery in southern California. Area fished: Sheephead are fished primarily south of Point Conception (Santa Barbara County) in nearshore waters around the offshore islands and along the mainland shore over rocky reefs and in kelp forests. Fishing season: Recreational anglers can fish for Sheephead from March 1through December 31 onboard boats south of Point Conception and May 1 through December 31 between Pigeon Point and Point Conception. Recreational divers and shore-based anglers can fish for Sheephead year round.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish Cognition: a Primate's Eye View
    Anim Cogn (2002) 5:1–13 DOI 10.1007/s10071-001-0116-5 REVIEW Redouan Bshary · Wolfgang Wickler · Hans Fricke Fish cognition: a primate’s eye view Received: 8 February 2001 / Accepted after revision: 6 September 2001 / Published online: 20 November 2001 © Springer-Verlag 2001 Abstract We provide selected examples from the fish lit- erature of phenomena found in fish that are currently be- Introduction ing examined in discussions of cognitive abilities and evolution of neocortex size in primates. In the context of Recently increased interest in cognitive aspects of the be- social intelligence, we looked at living in individualised haviour of animals is connected with advances in the de- groups and corresponding social strategies, social learning velopment of both theoretical frameworks and methodol- and tradition, and co-operative hunting. Regarding envi- ogy. Cognitive psychologists have adopted a more evolu- ronmental intelligence, we searched for examples concern- tionary approach to cognitive research (see historical re- ing special foraging skills, tool use, cognitive maps, mem- view in Kamil 1998). The major contribution of primatol- ory, anti-predator behaviour, and the manipulation of the ogy to cognitive psychology was arguably the develop- environment. Most phenomena of interest for primatolo- ment of the social intelligence hypothesis (Humphrey 1976; gists are found in fish as well. We therefore conclude that Byrne and Whiten 1988; Dunbar 1992), which states that more detailed studies on decision rules and mechanisms the evolution of cognitive skills together with a large neo- are necessary to test for differences between the cognitive cortex in primates was caused by the social complexity abilities of primates and other taxa.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Annual Marine Environmental Analysis and Interpretation Report
    2019 ANNUAL MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station ANNUAL MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station July 2020 Page intentionally blank Report Preparation/Data Collection – Oceanography and Marine Biology MBC Aquatic Sciences 3000 Red Hill Avenue Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Page intentionally blank TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................... iii LIST OF TABLES ...............................................................................................................................v LIST OF APPENDICES ................................................................................................................... vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................. vii CHAPTER 1 STUDY INTRODUCTION AND GENERATING STATION DESCRIPTION 1-1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 1-1 PURPOSE OF SAMPLING ......................................................................................... 1-1 REPORT APPROACH AND ORGANIZATION ........................................................ 1-1 DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA ................................................................... 1-1 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A List of Common and Scientific Names of Fishes from the United States And
    t a AMERICAN FISHERIES SOCIETY QL 614 .A43 V.2 .A 4-3 AMERICAN FISHERIES SOCIETY Special Publication No. 2 A List of Common and Scientific Names of Fishes -^ ru from the United States m CD and Canada (SECOND EDITION) A/^Ssrf>* '-^\ —---^ Report of the Committee on Names of Fishes, Presented at the Ei^ty-ninth Annual Meeting, Clearwater, Florida, September 16-18, 1959 Reeve M. Bailey, Chairman Ernest A. Lachner, C. C. Lindsey, C. Richard Robins Phil M. Roedel, W. B. Scott, Loren P. Woods Ann Arbor, Michigan • 1960 Copies of this publication may be purchased for $1.00 each (paper cover) or $2.00 (cloth cover). Orders, accompanied by remittance payable to the American Fisheries Society, should be addressed to E. A. Seaman, Secretary-Treasurer, American Fisheries Society, Box 483, McLean, Virginia. Copyright 1960 American Fisheries Society Printed by Waverly Press, Inc. Baltimore, Maryland lutroduction This second list of the names of fishes of The shore fishes from Greenland, eastern the United States and Canada is not sim- Canada and the United States, and the ply a reprinting with corrections, but con- northern Gulf of Mexico to the mouth of stitutes a major revision and enlargement. the Rio Grande are included, but those The earlier list, published in 1948 as Special from Iceland, Bermuda, the Bahamas, Cuba Publication No. 1 of the American Fisheries and the other West Indian islands, and Society, has been widely used and has Mexico are excluded unless they occur also contributed substantially toward its goal of in the region covered. In the Pacific, the achieving uniformity and avoiding confusion area treated includes that part of the conti- in nomenclature.
    [Show full text]
  • Cheaters Must Prosper: Reconciling Theoretical and Empirical Perspectives on Cheating in Mutualism
    Ecology Letters, (2015) 18: 1270–1284 doi: 10.1111/ele.12507 REVIEW AND SYNTHESIS Cheaters must prosper: reconciling theoretical and empirical perspectives on cheating in mutualism Abstract Emily I. Jones,1,2,3† Cheating is a focal concept in the study of mutualism, with the majority of researchers considering Michelle E. Afkhami,4 Erol Akßcay,5 cheating to be both prevalent and highly damaging. However, current definitions of cheating do Judith L. Bronstein,6 Redouan not reliably capture the evolutionary threat that has been a central motivation for the study of Bshary,7 Megan E. Frederickson,4 cheating. We describe the development of the cheating concept and distill a relative-fitness-based Katy D. Heath,8 Jason D. definition of cheating that encapsulates the evolutionary threat posed by cheating, i.e. that chea- Hoeksema,9 Joshua H. Ness,10 ters will spread and erode the benefits of mutualism. We then describe experiments required to 11 conclude that cheating is occurring and to quantify fitness conflict more generally. Next, we dis- M. Sabrina Pankey, Stephanie S. ‡ cuss how our definition and methods can generate comparability and integration of theory and Porter,12 Joel L. Sachs,12 Klara experiments, which are currently divided by their respective prioritisations of fitness consequences Scharnagl13 and Maren L. and traits. To evaluate the current empirical evidence for cheating, we review the literature on sev- Friesen13*,† eral of the best-studied mutualisms. We find that although there are numerous observations of low-quality partners, there is currently very little support from fitness data that any of these meet our criteria to be considered cheaters.
    [Show full text]
  • CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE Initial Indicators Of
    CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE Initial indicators of MPA success and factors that contribute to MPA efficacy A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements For the degree of Master of Science in Biology By Erin M. Jaco December 2018 The thesis of Erin M. Jaco is approved: _________________________________________ __________________ Dr. Robert Carpenter Date _________________________________________ __________________ Dr. Larry Allen Date _________________________________________ __________________ Dr. Mark Steele, Chair Date ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Mark Steele. Mark helped me in so many ways throughout the development and execution of my thesis research. By some how keeping me sane when I started getting lost down data and calculus rabbit holes, reminding me to keep the big picture in perspective, correcting my stacked modifiers, and trusting an Oregon driver to trailer his boat through Los Angeles traffic, Mark shaped me to be a better writer and scientist. I want to thank him for his mentorship and friendship. I would also like to thank the other two members of my thesis committee: Dr. Larry Allen and Dr. Robert Carpenter. Both Larry and Bob had invaluable insight into the development of my project. I really appreciate all of the comments and revisions that they contributed to my thesis. A huge thanks to everyone who helped with my field work: James French, Sigfrido Zimmermann, Lindsey Stockton, Hannah Nelson, Melissa Kurman, Juan Enciso, Zoë Scott, Dan Sternberg, Russell Dauksis, Kathryn Scafidi, George Jarvis, Erika Nava, Griffin Srednick, Alexis Estrada, Dorothy Horn, and Ashtyn Isaak. I cannot express how grateful I am to these positive and hardworking people who, paid only in kettle chips and gummy worms, put up with hours of tank hauling, early mornings, L.A.
    [Show full text]